From the technical and construction, known prior art includes: electrochemical installation—Russian patent RU2104961 [1] filed on Feb. 20, 1998, electrochemical cell for processing of water solutions, installation for production of anodic oxidation products, alkaline chloride solutions or alkali-earth metals—Russian patent RU2176989 [2] filed on Nov. 1, 2000, device for electrochemical processing of water and water solutions—Russian patent RU2248940 [3] filed on Jan. 16, 2004 and bicameral coaxial electrolytic cell device—Estonian patent application P200700021 [4] filed on Apr. 30, 2007.
There is a great demand for electrolytic cells with oxidant performance of 100 g/h and much more. For instance, such mass technology as decontamination of ballast water in ships requires the oxidant performance to be as high as 5000 g/h, and to maintain such performance for more than two years of use.
Electrolytic cells [1], [3] provide performance of 10 g/h each and there are no reliable ways to connect them into blocks of overall performance of more than 400 g/h. Electrolytic cells [2] provide performance of 40 g/h and [4] of 130 g/h and in certain situations up to 54 units may be hydraulically and electrically connected. One of the disadvantages of this solution is its lower reliability due to numerous hydraulic connections, complexity of the whole construction and high maintenance costs (including those related to removal of cathodic build-up). Therefore the common disadvantage of the listed electrolytic cells is their relatively low performance.
There are certain boundaries to enlarging the components' size in order to assemble them into a higher capacity and performance electrolytic cell, as it makes the manufacture process more expensive due to the need to use new and more expensive equipment and technologies, e.g. those for creation of protective anode layer or for manufacture of ceramic diaphragms.